Subjective and objective risk of ovarian cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish women testing for BRCA1/2 mutations

The impact of communicating uncertain test results in cancer genetic counseling: A systematic mixed studies review

OBJECTIVE

Cancer genetic counseling increasingly involves discussing uncertain test results, for example because multiple genes are sequenced simultaneously. This review was performed to provide insight into how counselors' communication of uncertain test results during genetic counseling for cancer affects counselors and counselees.

METHODS

A systematic mixed studies review was undertaken to review research on the effects of communicating uncertain test results. Four databases were searched using a PICO search strategy. Study findings of articles meeting the inclusion criteria were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included. Uncertain test results encompassed either an inconclusive test result or a variant of unknown significance (VUS). Counselees involved almost exclusively women at risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. None of the articles reported effects on counselor outcomes. Counselee outcomes were categorized as cognitive, affective or behavioral. Interpretation of a VUS was overall reported as difficult, and counselees' distress and worry were repeatedly found to decrease over time after the discussion of any uncertain test result. For most other outcomes, findings were sparse and/or inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Evidence on effects on counselee outcomes is scant and inconsistent. Future studies are warranted to provide insight into how counselees and counselors are affected.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinical practice could benefit from guidelines on how to address uncertain test results during pre- and posttest genetic consultations.

Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Potentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery.

FINDINGS

For women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer in Women: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Pathogenic mutations in breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 increase risks for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer in women; interventions reduce risk in mutation carriers.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force review on benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA1/2-related cancer in women.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane libraries; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE (January 1, 2013, to March 6, 2019, for updates; January 1, 1994, to March 6, 2019, for new key questions and populations); reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Discriminatory accuracy studies, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and observational studies of women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data on study methods, setting, population characteristics, eligibility criteria, interventions, numbers enrolled and lost to follow-up, outcome ascertainment, and results were abstracted. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cancer incidence and mortality; discriminatory accuracy of risk assessment tools for BRCA1/2 mutations; benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and risk-reducing interventions.

RESULTS

For this review, 103 studies (110 articles; N = 92 712) were included. No studies evaluated the effectiveness of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing in reducing incidence and mortality of BRCA1/2-related cancer. Fourteen studies (n = 43 813) of 8 risk assessment tools to guide referrals to genetic counseling demonstrated moderate to high accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.68-0.96). Twenty-eight studies (n = 8060) indicated that genetic counseling was associated with reduced breast cancer worry, anxiety, and depression; increased understanding of risk; and decreased intention for testing. Twenty studies (n = 4322) showed that breast cancer worry and anxiety were higher after testing for women with positive results and lower for others; understanding of risk was higher after testing. In 8 RCTs (n = 54 651), tamoxifen (relative risk [RR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]; 4 trials), raloxifene (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.24-0.80]; 2 trials), and aromatase inhibitors (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.70]; 2 trials) were associated with lower risks of invasive breast cancer compared with placebo; results were not specific to mutation carriers. Mastectomy was associated with 90% to 100% reduction in breast cancer incidence (6 studies; n = 2546) and 81% to 100% reduction in breast cancer mortality (1 study; n = 639); oophorectomy was associated with 69% to 100% reduction in ovarian cancer (2 studies; n = 2108); complications were common with mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among women without recently diagnosed BRCA1/2-related cancer, the benefits and harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing to reduce cancer incidence and mortality have not been directly evaluated by current research.

The utility of Leventhal's model in the analysis of the psycho-behavioral implications of familial cancer - a literature review

INTRODUCTION

We aim to highlight the utility of this model in the analysis of the psycho-behavioral implications of family cancer, presenting the scientific literature that used Leventhal's model as the theoretical framework of approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was performed in six databases (EBSCO, ScienceDirect, PubMed Central, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science) with empirical studies published between 2006 and 2015 in English with regard to the Common Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSMR) and familial/hereditary cancer. The key words used were: illness representations, common sense model, self regulatory model, familial/hereditary/genetic cancer, genetic cancer counseling. The selection of studies followed the PRISMA-P guidelines (Moher et al., 2009; Shamseer et al., 2015), which suggest a three-stage procedure.

RESULTS

Individuals create their own cognitive and emotional representation of the disease when their health is threatened, being influenced by the presence of a family history of cancer, causing them to adopt or not a salutogenetic behavior. Disease representations, particularly the cognitive ones, can be predictors of responses to health threats that determine different health behaviors. Age, family history of cancer, and worrying about the disease are factors associated with undergoing screening. No consensus has been reached as to which factors act as predictors of compliance with cancer screening programs.

CONCLUSIONS

This model can generate interventions that are conceptually clear as well as useful in regulating the individuals' behaviors by reducing the risk of developing the disease and by managing as favorably as possible health and/or disease.

Adapting the coping in deliberation (CODE) framework: a multi-method approach in the context of familial ovarian cancer risk management

OBJECTIVE

To test whether the coping in deliberation (CODE) framework can be adapted to a specific preference-sensitive medical decision: risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in women at increased risk of ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search to identify issues important to women during deliberations about RRSO. Three focus groups with patients (most were pre-menopausal and untested for genetic mutations) and 11 interviews with health professionals were conducted to determine which issues mattered in the UK context. Data were used to adapt the generic CODE framework.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 49 relevant studies, which highlighted various issues and coping options important during deliberations, including mutation status, risks of surgery, family obligations, physician recommendation, peer support and reliable information sources. Consultations with UK stakeholders confirmed most of these factors as pertinent influences on deliberations. Questions in the generic framework were adapted to reflect the issues and coping options identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The generic CODE framework was readily adapted to a specific preference-sensitive medical decision, showing that deliberations and coping are linked during deliberations about RRSO.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Adapted versions of the CODE framework may be used to develop tailored decision support methods and materials in order to improve patient-centred care.

Effectiveness of the Interventions Utilized in Genetic Counseling

Background. Advances in genetic science and biotechnology accumulated huge knowledge of genes and various genetic tests and diagnostic tools for healthcare providers including nurses. Genetic counseling became important to assist patients making decisions about obtaining genetic testing or preventive measures. Method. This review was conducted to describe the counseling topics, various interventions adopted in genetic counseling, and their effectiveness. Experimental studies (N=39) published between 1999 and 2012 were synthesized. Results. The most frequently covered topic was benefits and limitations of genetic testing on breast cancer ovarian and colorectal cancers. Most of researchers focused on evaluating cognitive aspect and psychological well-being. Conclusion. No single intervention was consistently reported to be effective. Decision aids enhanced with information technologies have potential to improve the outcomes of genetic counseling by providing tailored information and facilitating active engagement of patients in information uptake. Clinical Implication. When nurses are familiar with topics and interventions of genetic counseling, they are well positioned to provide genetic/genomic information to the patient and families.

Improving subjective perception of personal cancer risk: systematic review and meta-analysis of educational interventions for people with cancer or at high risk of cancer

BACKGROUND

Newly diagnosed patients with cancer require education about the disease, the available treatments and potential consequences of treatment. Greater understanding of cancer risk has been found to be associated with greater health-related quality of life, improved psychological adjustment and greater health-related behaviours. The aim of this sytematic review was to assess the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving subjective cancer risk perception and to appraise the quality of the studies.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies. Eligible studies were identified via Medline, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL and Embase databases. After screening titles and abstracts, two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of 206 full-text articles.

RESULTS

Forty papers were included in the review; the majority of studies were conducted among breast cancer patients (n = 29) and evaluated the effect of genetic counselling on personal perceived risk (n = 25). Pooled results from RCTs (n = 12) showed that, both in the short and long term, educational interventions did not significantly influence risk perception level (standardised mean difference 0.05, 95% CI -0.24-0.34; p = 0.74) or accuracy (odds ratio = 1.96, 95% CI: 0.61-6.25; p = 0.26). Only one RCT reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p = 0.01). Of prospective observational studies (n = 28), many did demonstrate changes in the level of perceived risk and improved risk accuracy and risk ratings in both the short and long term. However, only one (of three) observational studies reported a short-term difference in risk ratings (p < = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Further development and investigation of educational interventions using good quality, RCTs are warranted.

Perceived risk of cervical cancer in Appalachian women

OBJECTIVE

To examine perceptions of cervical cancer risk in elevated-risk Appalachians.

METHODS

Appalachian women (n=571) completed interviews examining self-regulation model factors relevant to perceived risk of cervical cancer.

RESULTS

Women with good/very good knowledge of cervical cancer, greater worry, and history of sexually transmitted infection had higher odds of rating their perceived risk as somewhat/much higher than did other women. Former smokers, compared to never smokers, had lower risk perceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-regulation model factors are important to understanding perceptions of cervical cancer risk in underserved women. The relationship of smoking and worry to perceived risk may be a target for intervention.

Screening for gynaecologic cancers in genetically predisposed women

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome and hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer syndrome are the two most important syndromes responsible for inherited cancers in gynaecology. Genetic testing is available for both these syndromes. Breast cancer gene testing is affordable and easy in women with ancestry where the mutation patterns are known, whereas other population groups need full gene screening. Hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer syndrome can now be diagnosed more frequently with the use of immunohistochemistry. Ovarian cancer risk is high in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes, and advanced screening techniques should be used when preventive surgery is not an option. Early detection techniques offer less protection than prophylactic removal, but enable women to retain their reproductive organs. Oophorectomy has the advantage of reducing breast cancer risk. In colorectal cancer syndromes, the risk for endometrial and ovarian cancer is much elevated. These risks should be recognised and addressed as these diseases are easy to prevent.

Subjective versus objective risk in genetic counseling for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancers

Background

Despite the fact that genetic counseling in oncology provides information regarding objective risks, it can be found a contrast between the subjective and objective risk.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of the perceived risk compared to the objective risk estimated by the BRCApro computer model and to evaluate any associations between medical, demographic and psychological variables and the accuracy of risk perception.

Methods

130 subjects were given medical-demographic file, Cancer and Genetic Risk Perception, Hospital Anxiety-Depression Scale. It was also computed an objective evaluation of the risk by the BRCApro model.

Results

The subjective risk was significantly higher than objective risk. The risk of tumour was overestimated by 56%, and the genetic risk by 67%. The subjects with less cancer affected relatives significantly overestimated their risk of being mutation carriers and made a more innacurate estimation than high risk subjects.

Conclusion

The description of this sample shows: general overestimation of the risk, inaccurate perception compared to BRCApro calculation and a more accurate estimation in those subjects with more cancer affected relatives (high risk subjects). No correlation was found between the levels of perception of risk and anxiety and depression. Based on our findings, it is worth pursuing improved communication strategies about the actual cancer and genetic risk, especially for subjects at "intermediate and slightly increased risk" of developing an hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer or of being mutation carrier.

Psychosocial aspects of genetic testing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With rapid advances in genetic testing for disease susceptibility, behavioral medicine faces significant challenges in identifying likely patterns of use, how individuals interpret test results, and psychosocial and health impacts of testing. We review recent research on these psychosocial aspects of genetic testing for disease risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

Individuals exhibit limited sensitivity in their perceptions of genetic risk information, and mental representations of disease risk appear to guide testing perceptions and behavioral responses. Motivations to undergo testing are complex, and efforts to develop decision aids are underway. Findings on psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing vary markedly, with some evidence of minimal or positive effects and other evidence indicating negative consequences that may be undetectable using common measures of general well being. Recent evidence suggests that genetic risk information can motivate health behavior change. Research demonstrates wide-ranging influences of testing on family dynamics, and use of genetic testing with children is of increasing concern.

SUMMARY

More research is needed to determine how to structure health communications and counseling to motivate informed use, promote positive responses, and optimize behavior change. Given the ramifications of genetic information for families, personalized genomics will demand a shift toward a family-based healthcare model.